Contents

Fans frequently use the term Porn when referring to sexually explicit fanworks that are created at least in part to arouse the reader or viewer, as opposed to depictions of sexual abuse that are meant to evoke only pity or rage. (But see also authorial intent).

In a fannish context, "porn" does not refer to the pornography industry.

Fans may also refer to non-sexual fanworks (or sourcetexts) as "porn" if those texts fill a different need. For instance, emoporn is emotionally satisfying the way sexually explicit porn is erotically satisfying.

The intentional misspellings pron and pr0n may have been invented to avoid filters for explicit sexual content. The terms are now often used as affectionate slang for porn. One early use of the term was in the October 1981 issue of The Clipper Trade Ship.

Different fandoms may use different terms to describe porn in their milieu. For instance, furry fandom uses "spooge" or "furporn." In Lois & Clark, a primarily het fandom, it's called "Nfic" for "naughty fic". Jane Austen fandom, another predominantly het arena, sometimes calls it "NB" for "naughty bit" or "nasty bit". Many anime & manga fandoms in the 90s and early 2000s used the term "lemon" (with "lime" being the equivalent of "teen").

A Very Early Fannish Use

While the word "porn" in the mainstream world in a negative way for a long time, the term was used by fans affectionately as early as 1978. From the editorial of a Star Trek: TOS zine, Fantasia #2:

Fandom, too, has changed somewhat in the year since my first issue. There have been some problems, not the least of which is the latest rift between the porn-haters and the porn-lovers (I use the word 'porn' here very loosely to refer to any fiction that is adult in content, although I really don't feel that much of the adult Treklit is really pornographic). Being "pro porn" myself, I've decided to put my two cent's worth in…

Admitted Unrealism

Fannish porn, like non-fannish porn, can be viewed as being unrealistic. Some fans say this like it was a bad thing!

One fan writes:

Pornography is unrealistic. But that’s great! When you think about it, the more real porn is, the more horrifying it can be. And textual porn is unrealistic by its very nature, in that text distances the reader from some of the harsher truths of sex. When you read, you get to use your imagination, rather than having bodily imperfections, embarrassing noises, and inconvenient excretions thrust upon your various senses. If I wanted something that was mortifying, inconvenient, awkward, stressful, poorly timed, and disappointing, I wouldn’t bother looking for porn, I would just have real sex.[1]